Subject: Re: Forks (long)

From: [email-masked] (Mo Charles)
Date: 18 May 1994 11:49:27 -0000

In response to your lengthy and extremely interesting monologue about the
history of the table fork of the 11th, I would like to say that, quite
sincerely and with utmost admiration, you, ma'am, have far too much time on
your hands.

You also, incidentally, neglected to mention the original use of the table
fork.  Starting in the 9th century, forks were used as a torture device in
many noble households.  Of course, it certainly did not have the same
appearance as it does now.  The handle was elongated, to facilitate use at a
distance, and the prongs were straighter, although of the same approximate
dimensions.  Only when Cannibalism became more popular did it become an
eating utensil.  Actually, it was created for the affixation of genitals to
wooden tables.

---

From: [email-masked] (Karen Cooper)
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 19:22:31 GMT

>eating utensil.  Actually, it was created for the affixation of genitals to

Hmmm. I think you may be joking, here, but allow me to point out that the
forks used by cannibals in New Guinea did have elongated handles, but also had
quite a bit longer tines, and only two of them.

Such may be viewed in a display at Chicago's Field Museum.

Karen.

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul M Comeau)
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:28:38 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
>eating utensil.  Actually, it was created for the affixation of genitals to

Let's not get this mess going again, okay?  Some of us are actually
interested.  That may make us pathetic losers, but it also makes me a
history major with an emphasis on social history and an interest in my
subject.  So be nice or go away.

Wendy
--
******************************************************************************

		Carol & Wendy          [email-masked]  

			"If ... you can't be a good example, 
			 then you'll just have to be a
			 horrible warning."   

			--Catherine Aird